Connect
← Return to What metric to watch?
Discussion
Comment receiving replies
In theory the CGM makes finger sticks redundant.
However in practice it's not entirely unreasonable to "get a second opinion", all the testing devices have pretty wide error bars (that is, are only guaranteed within plus or minus 15% or so) so you could have an 85 and 115 from the same blood droplet. In practice they are usually closer than that, but now and then they might also be a bit worse.
I have two brands of meters, no CGM. The more expensive one seems more accurate, the cheaper one, when the reading is going high or low, tends to read higher or lower, exaggerates the deviation by 5-10 points. I could still get by on just the cheap one, but it's good to have a calibration like that.
I doubt if many people with CGMs also do finger sticks.
BTW you'll see this on A1C readings, too, variations of as much as half a point between a lab test and an office machine - and there are home A1C meters if you want one, but it's a dollar or more per test strip, last time I looked.
Don't really need it, average BG converts with a formula like your CGM is showing you.
HTH
Replies to "In theory the CGM makes finger sticks redundant. However in practice it's not entirely unreasonable to..."
Connect
@carbcounter & @anonymom3 My daughter is a school nurse who helps almost 100 kids manage their diabetes. Adolescents are notoriously poorly managed due to puberty, lifestyle, family denial/dynamics, and not wanting to be "different" so it can be a challenge. She always has her kids double check unusual CGM readings with finger sticks, which sometimes makes her unpopular with parents and providers. Everyone should be lucky enough to have such a diligent advocate!
The bottom line, according to her, both high and low readings should be confirmed with a finger stick.
I have been around diabetes for almostww233 my entire life. I remember my Granmere and my friend "peeing on a stick" back in the 1950's! And boiling and reusing needles and syringes.